sideshow

25 billion? based on what numbers? do you have a link? and if so, im sure the gst rakes in enough, what with the huge surpluses, etc. would help cover it. i would think that the extra disposable income would help stimulate the economy, and also give people back more of their own money rather than give it to government and (after their take) then have them squander it on the same people they took it from-low income earners.

I think that they should leave the taxes, brackets, and gst as they are-just raise the zero tax paid threashold to 25k per year. This provides tax relief to everyone, has no burden on employers, and puts money in the pockets of those that need it most-the lowest wage earners. if anything, it would allow for LOWER than the current wage minimums discussed in other threads without detriment to the worker, and more incentives to the employer. but then that might make sense so it will never happen.

It sure is a commercial transaction when someone steps on my lawn-they have now vandalized my grass. Neighbourhood kids kill my grass by continually walking on it. So as my property, these kids using my property as a walkway, why can I not have a contract with anyone that walks upon my private property to use it to their advantage. Every time they walk on it and kill my grass, I am losing a profit because now its money out of my pocket to buy more grass seed. Ludicrious? Of course. Just like the record industry. 1984 is coming quick.

I guess that is part of the argument on both sides-the amount of work that is required outside of class. For some it will always be higher than others. Because some are more efficient than others. And I would think there would be a bit more prep at the beginning of the year (as teachers get to know the kids, their issues, and their strengths and weaknesses) than near the end. But there has to be a proper compromise. If teachers need less class time, they have to show why and justify it. And if there is a proper reason to reduce the time, then it only makes sense to decrease the compensation(minus bargained cola increases, etc.) PER HOUR. Unless this is offset by work that needs to be done outside of the classroom-and can be legitimate and proven. A fair days wage for a fair days work. Its a two way street.

I took a sample contract of a group of Teachers in Manitoba (my current province). Here is the pay scale: Salary Scale - Fall 2006 Exp Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6 Class 7 0 28,904 33,654 38,752 44,631 47,631 50,586 53,552 1 30,539 35,533 40,841 47,015 50,090 53,186 56,273 2 32,174 37,412 42,930 49,399 52,549 55,786 58,994 3 33,809 39,291 45,019 51,783 55,008 58,386 61,715 4 35,444 41,170 47,108 54,167 57,467 60,986 64,436 5 37,079 43,049 49,197 56,551 59,926 63,586 67,157 6 38,714 44,928 51,286 58,935 62,385 66,186 69,878 7 61,319 64,844 68,786 72,599 8 63,703 67,303 71,386 75,320 9+ 66,087 69,762 73,986 78,041 interesting enough, while the wage scale is huge (28k to 78k) there is NO mention of required hours of work in the agreement-either in class or out. very interesting as i would think both sides would want that. this was just one ca btw, so obviously has no significance, but i thought it was interesting.

I would think it would be fairly easy to come up with a fair compensation package for teachers and outline in the agreement both classroom and extra curricular hours needed, and then put them in print.

police come into DAILY contact with people with hiv, hep C, and all manner of other things. and they get spit at, bled on, urinate and feces thrown at them, etc. if anything, their contact with pathogens is as high or higher than a nurses-as the nurses deal with the patients within the hospital environment, rather than entering a residence with blood on everything, and irrational people spitting at you. by the time the nurse meets these people, they have been "socially realigned" in most cases by police to allow for the nurse to perform their duties. and this goes for fire personel that are often the first on scene. they also are exposed to these sort of people, but yet lack the equipment and training in many instances to protect themselves. as for violence, from what i have seen, nurses are at a higher risk than teachers. they deal day after day with belligerent drunks that are unpredictable, and sometimes not even meaning to be, are violent in action.

Then how did Senator Joe Lieberman (Independent) get elected? Greens do not hold a federal office, yet they are counted as a viable party? sympathy vote....?

@Riverwind Putting a disclaimer on a product is not the same as binding someone to a legal contract. Does the label say anything to the effect of "By purchasing this product you agree to....blah blah blah?" and is it enforceable? And why? I could put a sign on my grass that says "by stepping on my lawn you agree to come back next saturday and cut it", but it doesnt make it so. Also, my salad dressing says to "shake well before pouring". Is that a binding agreement that I agreed to before purchasing it? Im saying this tongue in cheek, but you get the idea here. Also, your example says "lending". So do you agree that if you purchase (for the sake of argument) a dvd, that you should not be able to lend it someone-because now you have stolen the product and deprived the studios of their profit? I still don't get it.

Well by the numbers you have posted, and i am confident that they are accurate, they DO receive yearly financial compensation in line with nurses, police, etc. Because unless they can show that they work MORE hours than these professions, then they will be, oh i dont know, SOL in proving their point. As a side note, and not to knock teachers as they do have an important role in society, my personal belief is that nurses and police and fire, etc. should be compensated higher-due to many factors, not least of which is the constant dangers that they face (pathogens, violent people, etc.). As well, these other professionals end up working weekends, nights, holidays, etc-which would make sense to compensate them at a higher rate. Just my two cents.

Because the contract you agreed to when you purchased the DVD prohibits you from doing so. But I have not agreed to ANY contract through my purchase. If I had a contract, it would have to be communicated to me-which it is not at the point of purchase. I walk into a store, give money to the teller, and receive a product. Its not like when I purchase insurance, a home, etc. where I SIGN a contract after sitting down, being presented with the terms and conditions of my purchase, and then making a decision to purchase or not. Understanding that contracts dont have to be written to be fully legal, by putting a copyright disclaimer on a video that i have already purchased, opened and brought home, is not enforceable-at least not in canada and not now. As for loss of profit. If I make a copy of something, or reproduce it, at my own expense, how is it a loss of profit for the original supplier? I really dont see the logic in the argument there. You can't lose something that you don't have. A step further. What if I don't make a copy of the dvd, but i only bring my copy over to a family or friends house-is there a loss of profit? Am I, or are they stealing? I just don't see it. A better way to deal with this would be to increase the cost of media storage, and provide a "kickback" to the industry. I could live with that. The copyright laws just leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Police officers make in the same neighbourhood as nurses-top rate is in the 65-70 k range, and is based on roughly the same amount of hours-40 times 52 weeks minus vacation, stats, etc. numbers vary nationwide of course, but there isnt a massive difference between regions. One of the courses i took in university was collective bargaining and the group we used at the time was the teachers and their associations contracts. i cant recall the exact specifics, but i do remember thinking that they were not as lucratively compensated as i had previously thought them to be. as for the 3 months holidays-well i think that most professionals end up with about 2 months off a year-10 or stats, 6 or so weeks vacation, etc. so its not a massive stretch for the extra month-still an extra 4 weeks, but i would have to actually see the contract. having been through the collective bargaining process many times myself, i will say that what the public believes, sees, and "knows", is very different from what is actually happening at the table. and both sides puff their chests up and strut around and "leak" information that is not always what it seems. at the end of the day, the teachers have the right to job action on their terms, the employer has the right to refuse on their terms, the government has the right to legislate one way or the other on its terms, and the parents have the right to exert pressure on all sides. not knowing ANY of the particulars, I do think that 10 percent over 3 years is a fair financial settlement-but then i dont know if there are other underlying issues that are not made public.

There are a few distinctions that have to be made. A person that takes a camera and records a movie and then sells it is one thing. But a person who buys the movie and then makes copies and FREELY DISTRIBUTES THEM is another. If I purchase a DVD, why should I not be able to share that product with others-if I am not making a profit? Because I have not stolen anything-i have paid for the product. Once I have the product, what business is it of the industry to restrict my personal use of it? Example. If I go to Safeway and buy a dozen steaks, why should they be able to tell me that I have to eat them myself, rather than pass them out to friends? Or to go back to the tomatoe argument, if i want to plant the tomatoe seeds and then give out free tomatoes to my neighbours, what business of Safeways would it be? And would you consider that stealing? I would think not.

Some great points. But put it into another perspective. What if i go to the market and purchase some tomatoes. And then plant the seeds, grow a bunch more tomatoes and sell them. Is there a law that allows the original seller of the tomatoes (or flowers, or whatever) preventing me from using the seeds, from a lawfully purchased product, and then "creating, duplicating, whatever" for either personal, or financial reasons? I ask this because I honestly don't know. But if the answer is YES, there is a law that prevents this, then I think its absurd. If the answer is NO, then why should the same not apply to the "intellectual rights" associated with digital media? And blueblood, I agree with you-you are getting the shaft in my opinion. I just don't know enough about farming to provide an educated opinion on what, if anything should be done.

Mental illness is particularly different from other aspects of health because it confounds the concept of responsibility and informed consent for treatment. For example, a mentally ill person is told that he has cancer and needs treatment. Following this, he agrees to accepting a proposed treatment but forgets the conversation one minute later. Effectively, the oncologist has said nothing. How should the oncologist spend his time? I have to agree with your assessment CA. The very sad truth is that a very large percentage of mentally ill people end up on the street, are physically and sexually abused, and ALSO have substance abuse problems. They make up a very large proportion of the calls that FIRE, AMBULANCE, and POLICE respond to in core regions. They cost huge amounts in regards to resources used from the above, as well as hospitals, and "contribute" in a large way to the problematic waiting times at inner city hospitals. These people are unable to help themselves. They are a burden to themselves, others, and society. My personal belief is that there should be some sort of mandatory law, policy or whatever that emergency service people can avail themselves of to have these people placed in proper care. I don't know what exactly, but they need to be in some sort of "home, facility, or institution" with 24 hour supervision to ensure they don't hurt themselves or others, stay off intoxicating substances, and that they are taking the required medications for their illnesses. As well, most of them can't even take care of their basic health and cleanliness needs. It is nice to see a thread where there is some compassion and empathy from posters from all ends of the political spectrum.

Blueblood, I agree with most of your points. Side note, farmers get the shaft-no doubt about it. Concerning copyrights, etc. the industry should just deal with it. People have been recording with tape cassettes, and vhs tapes for years and years and years. Its just now that technology is allowing for more widespread communication that they are saying "whoa, our massive profits are not as massive-stop the press!". I dont think people should be allowed to copy and then SELL movies, music, etc., but there should be nothing wrong with downloading, recording, etc. for personal use if there is no money exchanged. Look at it this way. If I tape a copy of American Idol and give it to a friend to watch, am I stealing? Should they be forced to wait for it to come out on DVD and buy it? Thats absurd. But if I start recording it, package it as a DVD and then start selling it on the internet or such, then I can see where there would be a problem. Just my two cents.

I would much prefer an income tax cut to the gst cut. But i do believe that the gst is a more regressive tax, so my opinion is based purely on selfish self economics.

I can't speak to that specific collective bargaining environment, but I do know that in my jurisdiction, they work many more than 4.8 hours a day. There are required duties of teachers which do in fact make them required to work more than the "scheduled" hours of work, so the dollar per hour figures above are actually quite skewed from reality (at least in my area). I think (if i can recall-its been a couple of years since i have read their agreements) that the wages are pretty much on par per hour with a nurse, police officer, etc.

I think that there are way bigger fish to fry than the term "visible minorities". The UN does a lot of good in the world, but in this instance, give me a break.

My spelling, my grammar, I'm bad. You're alot of hot air. Party A LOL life is too short to take any of this very seriously my friend.

Too bad the US has only one more party than communist Cuba. As opposed to Canada which has only two more, but only one viable. LOL! My spelling, my grammar, my bad. And four is still better than two. But in the US you only get to vote for Party A, or Party A-same party for the most part.

"The Provincial Health coverage responds before WCB. As is all other purchased health coverage and even auto accidents. These are all supplemental insurance coverages." In Manitoba, if you are involved in a work related auto accident, you have to choose between MPIC (auto insurance) and WCB. Once your choice is made, you can't go back.

I think that this is the most interesting US election in many many years. I feel that the interesting candidates with differing opinions and backgrounds in both parties is very refreshing and will make for a great race. Two bad the US is only one more party than communist Cuba.

Maybe what is needed is to get rid of all these artificial provincial boundaries and just have one country. One set of rules, one government, one set of taxes, etc. I can hear the crying and whining already......

Right on the money. I've dealt with Sunlife, Blue Cross, Manulife, and Greenshield and this is the case with all of them concerning coverage of a workplace injury.